On Apr 5, 2005 10:51 AM, Neil Schneider <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > As with most Microsoft funded studies, it's mostly FUD.
I'm looking at a slick two page ad now, in the March 7, 2005 issue of InformationWeek. The left page is all orange, with the words, "ADDING UP THE COSTS OF LINUX VS. WINDOWS? BE SURE TO ADD THE INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RISKS, TOO." The right page gives a testimonial from Jamey Anderson, Technology Services Manager at ADC Telecommunications. Anderson says, "We simply aren't interested in having to worry about potential legal risks of deploying Red Hat Linux. Knowing the way that Microsoft stands behind its products with IP indemnification, it's one less thing that I have to worry about." He goes on to say, "With the Linux lawsuits happening, it's something I pay a lot of attention to." I'm really not surprised that such an innovative technology leader is finding such novel ways of shoveling out FUD. I do think it's noteworthy that Microsoft is willing to resort to tactics that many of its potential customers are going to be able to identify as being so low-life. Anybody who wants to knows that "the Linux lawsuits" refers to SCO, and that it was far from being plural in any significant sense. Microsoft is risking its neck in a way that you'd never see, say..., IBM do. If you've got something worth buying, then the only purpose of advertising is to let people know about it On some level, everybody with buying power knows this. -todd -- [email protected] http://www.kernel-panic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/kplug-list
